Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare destructiveHint=true, idempotentHint=false, and readOnlyHint=false, so the agent knows DELETE is a mutating, non-idempotent, destructive operation. The description adds only the canvas-annotation context and never warns that deletion is permanent or that ADD requires position/content while UPDATE does not.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two short sentences, with the action and resource front-loaded and zero wasted words. Nothing is repeated from the title or schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With 7 parameters, nested position/size objects, no output schema, and rich annotations, the schema carries most of the burden and the description is adequate as a summary. However, it omits that different operations require different parameters and says nothing about the effect or reversibility of DELETE, leaving real gaps for a destructive multi-operation tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so width/height defaults, enum colors, noteId usage, and operation semantics are all documented in the schema. The description adds no parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema already states, so baseline 3 applies.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description gives a specific verb triple (add/update/delete) and a clear resource (canvas notes on a flow), plus a one-line explanation of what notes are. It does not need to differentiate from siblings because no other tool in the list touches notes, but it also does not explicitly say so.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives, nor on prerequisites such as needing an existing flowId or the noteId required for UPDATE/DELETE. The second sentence only defines what a note is, not when to manage one.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.